Marvel has announced that Iron Man 2 will hit theaters on April 30th 2010. All the stars (including Robert Downey Jr, Terrance Howard and Gwyneth Paltrow) had standard three-picture deal stipulations worked into their respective contracts, and are basically nailed down for the sequel. But what about director Jon Favreau? He didn’t even know about a sequel until Marvel announced it yesterday. And while he would love to return for a sequel, it isn’t yet a done deal.
“We’ve been speaking informally about it,” Favreau told EW. “In concept we would all love to work together again. But I found out about the announcement last night, so it’s not something that - we would definitely love to collaborate more with the sequel. There’s no formal arrangement yet, but in theory we would all love to see it happen…. There’s definitely a lot of ideas that we all have now. This type of movie is based on serialized materials, so it lends itself very easily to [many different sequel possibilities]. There’s definitely a level of enthusiasm from myself and the cast to tell more stories.”
I think most people would agree that Favreau’s participation was essential to Iron Man’s success. Heck, it’s the best reviewed comic book movie of all time, and Farveau set the perfect tone. But it sounds like there is some disagreement as to what Iron Man will do 
next, and how much Marvel wants Favreau involved. In past interviews, Jon has expressed interest in tackling the Demon in a Bottle storyline which involved Stark coming face to face with his own demons (alcoholism). Not quite the family friendly direction Marvel seems to be headed.
“Demon in a Bottle is one of the very strongest story lines of the of the series, and Iron Man is not a comic book character who is known for having wonderful storylines. He’s known for having great suits, great characters, but the villains kind of get thin at times, and it’s so very dated when you look at Communism and the metaphor. Politically, much of it doesn’t hold up well. And the Mandarin is incredibly challenging in that respect. So we have challenges ahead of us. Demon in a Bottle tends to be one that, from a storytelling perspective, is compelling to all of us.
But at the end of the day, Favreau praises Marvel for green-lighting a movie based on The Avengers (due in July 2011), a franchise that Favreau consciously set-up in Iron man, instead of making a less superior third Iron Man film.
“I think it would be a very smart third film in the Iron Man series. It’s very difficult to keep these franchises from running out of gas after two [movies]. The high point seems to be the second one, judging by history: If you just look at the consensus in the reviews, you see that X-Men 2 and Spider-Man 2 are sort of seen by the fans as the sort of high point of both franchises, though I don’t necessarily agree with that. But to be able to fold it into an Avengers is something you just couldn’t do in another studio, and I think what Marvel is about is stuff you can’t do at a bigger studio. They gave me tremendous creative freedom; they gave me tremendous freedom in casting, at the end of the day. Even though there was concern, they ultimately backed a decision [to hire Downey to play Tony Stark] that I don’t think a studio would’ve, and now they’re benefiting from having that nimble creative team. And that’s, honestly, the most attractive aspect of working with them again.”
Discuss: Would you watch Iron Man 2 if Jon Farveau isn’t a part of it?
May 6th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
I would watch it just to watch it. But it probably wouldn’t be as good. I’m the kind of person that watches a sequel, whether or not it looks good, just to say that I have seen it.
“Yea I saw the sequel. It sucked.”
May 6th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Yeah, I’d watch it. Just like Nick said, just for the sake OF watching it. But I feel Favreau would be a great asset to helm the movie.
May 6th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
I hope Favreau comes back, but I’d certainly watch a sequel either way.
May 6th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Yeah he most definitely needs to come aboard. I hate it when the tone of a franchise changes between sequels. That’s why I appreciate Fox bringing Brett Ratner aboard on X3. He didn’t temper with the tone set by Bryan Singer (the argument that he created a subpar sequel is another matter). I also get the feeling the cast of Iron Man enjoyed working with Favreau. Heck, why fix something that isn’t broken?
May 6th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
It would depend on the director Marvel would hire if Favreau
doesn’t return. If the next director turns out a solid flick
then I’ll go, if it looks crappy…I’d probably wait for DVD.
After the Spidey 3 and X-Men 3 debacles I won’t waste my
money. Though to be fair I went blindly in on opening day
when I should have stepped back and looked at word of mouth.
Going into Iron Man I had a gut feeling it would be good and
the word of mouth only confirmed it, so sitting in the theater
on Sat morning I was giddy and definitely not disappointed.
May 6th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
I totally agree. Why change horses in the middle of a race? It’s obvious that this director/film combo has emerged as a powerhouse. I don’t see why they wouldn’t want him back. This has to be one of THE best movies that I’ve seen in a while. I really hope the collaboration continues but I have to admit that I would still see it regardless.
May 6th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
I’m not going to watch any movies ever again if Jon Farveau isn’t a part of Swingers 2.
May 6th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Although I did like Iron Man, I kinda felt that the direction of the film was the main thing holding it back from being something really special. I would love for Jon to return for a sequel and hopefully work out the kinks from the first one, but I wouldn’t mind seeing a different director at the helm. That is as long as he’s talented and not Brett Ratner.
May 6th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Actually to be honest why is everyone getting so wrapped up about Favreau. The movie is really carried entirely by the acting and design. The action scenes weren’t very intense and a lot of the camerawork was pretty bland and cliche. Would like it to be given to someone better.
May 6th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
I agree with Eric, the action was cool, the comedy was good, but at the end of the day I thought it was to “cartoony”. It was more “Fantastic Four” than “Dark Knight” if you catch my drift.
May 6th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
I finally got the free time to go see this movie and liked it a lot and was liked the on screen chemistry even more (I found myself paying attention to Gwyneth Paltrow for one of the first times ever) and I just think that Favreau is to Iron Man as Nolan is to Batman. (Never saw that on the SATs)
May 6th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
MCG will direct Iron-Man 2
May 6th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
C’mon, Marvel will hire Jon to do the sequel, no question! Who are you people? This is a HUGE hit for the brand-new studio, they won’t mess with the chemistry that is making them rich. C’mon, it isn’t a controversy, it isn’t even really a question. They’ll work out the contract pretty damn quick and get back to work.
Also, I think the Demon in a Bottle story will owe a lot to just how successful Hancock is this summer. If audiences respond to a drunk super hero then IM2 will move in that direction. if they don’t, then maybe we’ll see another plot used.
May 6th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
@ Captain Awesome
And bring Uwe Boll in as producer and screenwriter.
May 6th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
“This is a HUGE hit for the brand-new studio, they won’t mess with the chemistry that is making them rich.”
Did you see Spider-man 3 and X-Men 3?
May 6th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
Captain Awesome, yes and I get your point, but remember this is Marvel now in control of their own franchise. They have a lot more at stake in this game financially and a lot more control over the final product. I honestly don’t believe they’ll hire anyone else to direct number two. In fact, from what I’ve heard, it’s almost a lock. They’re working on details.
May 6th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
I dont see why the demon-in-a-bottle storyline couldnt be reasonably kid-friendly. infact, in australia at the moment there is a big media frenzy on underage and binge drinking, and i think a blockbuster sequel with a storyline like that would be greeted favourably by parents.
May 6th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
@ JP Dyno
There is a problem like that here in America as well but the only problem is that there are groups that believe the only proper video to address the issue would be a silent local church produced video of Jesus beating a 50 foot bottle of Jack Daniels with a cross. Not a fancy pants Hollywood talking picture.
May 6th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
I think I’d say no.
Looking at the track record (on a purely cinematic standpoint) for comic-book sequels, there’s been bad (Burton and Schumacher’s second cracks at Batman), but there’s also been vast improvement (Singer and Raimi took X-Men and Spider-Man, respectively, to tremendous heights). So I’d say Favreau pretty much has to stay on board for it to succeed. And firing the dude who was integral in getting your movie great reviews and even better box office would be completely idiotic, but not the first time.
May 6th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Lol, anyone here that believes that Fav will not be back is seriously mistaken. Marvel has established there first sell here. He is what really made Iron Man, it was his visions that did so. He is not going anywhere. Marvel will do whatever it takes to keep him in the Marvel Universe. Hell he might even end up directing other heroes for them and probably Avengers. He isnt going anywhere. I also so that people were referencing Spiderman and X-Men above. Um, they are not completely owned movie wise by Marvel you all. Those movies are a collaberation with other studios everyone. So they will go wityh whoever they want to direct them, please quit referencing what Marvel will do with there movies compared to those. Marvel has there own Production studio now. They will not mess it up at least that fast, they will build off of what works so far, and that has only been Iron Man. The pieces are laid in place now, look for this company to be a major player for years to come……. Anthony
May 6th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
I really love watching directors’ diiferent takes with the Mission Impossible franchise. Sure, most people just want story arc and continuity, but at the end of the day, what they really want is a cool movie that brings a lot of kickass to the table. I’d guess that Favreau and the studio will bang out a contract, but if it doesn’t happen, it’s sure not a total loss (assuming they can sign on someone that brings something to the table).
May 6th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
I love that Marvel is somehow infallible now in the movie biz. I can only imagine how fast that worm might turn.
May 6th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
I loved Iron Man. I think Jon Favreau and his crew have mastered the craft of condensing a hundred issues of a comic series into a movie that fanboys and general audiences alike will love.
If Marvel wants to continue dominating the movie industry with summer blockbusters of American mythology for the next 20 years, it will start with convincing Favreau to continue his work with these characters and stories. The studios should retain him for these projects at any cost.
May 6th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
Jon Farveau + Robert Downey Jr + Ironman 2 = SUCCESS!
marvel would be damn crazy if they dont bring farveau back!
May 6th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Jon Farveau is the reason I had interest to see Iron Man. His films are great. Without Farveau (or Downey) I have no interest in “Iron Man 2″.
Marvel shouldn’t be stupid. Unless they want the pile of junk that is Superman 2.
May 6th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
No, he’s gotta stay and Tony Stark should battle with alchoholism it makes the character more beliveable, same way Spidey’s been made believable as a nerdy teenage kid.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
1. I think Favreau certainly brought a lot to Iron Man in terms of dealing with the characters, etc. but his action direction was definitely the weakest part of the movie.
2. I think /Film should wait a year or two before calling Iron Man the best reviewed comic book movie of all time. And even then, the measures used to come up with such a title are specious at best and really just silly.
May 6th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
One of the things I loved about Iron Man is how “adult” it felt. I wonder though if an Avengers movie can maintain that same vibe. The whole “superteam” thing just seems really juvenile and over the top.
Oh and Favs will be back, for sure. Marvel would be stupid not to use the same creative team. What I would like to see is parts 2 and 3 done back to back with one main story arc. They should use ‘Demon In A Bottle’ as the foundation with with Mandarin as the villain in 2 and Rhodes/War Machine as the villain in 3. End part 2 on a bit of a downer ala Empire Strikes Back and you’ve got it made.
Also I believe comic films can lead to great sequels, they just have to resist the urge to up the ante on everything.
May 7th, 2008 at 7:57 am
I believe that Marvel would sign on Jon Faverau for the sequel just as they would for anyone of their comic book artists who’s delivered an awesome hit.
As many have stated, I would watch the movie for the sake of watching it, but I would be asking myself how Favreau would have done it if the sequel sucks.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
it’d be watched but don’t mean it’d be GOOD. i like the demon in a bottle idea, and i would love to actually see the mandarin…
please, please, please do the mandarin. if they don’t it’s only other guys in armor to fight and i don’t think a more-of-th-same movie would garner quite as glowing reviews
when downey jr was asked on tv he said he and favs had been brainstorming on their flights between countries and favs always said he was think in terms of atrilogy so i’d say it’s a safe bet he’ll return
June 17th, 2008 at 5:57 am
well i really hope that his is but if not i would probably watch anyways i think that the way the movie started and torwards the end when terrance howard said next time while looking at war machine is going to be the next step remember war machine and ironman where best friends at first and if my hunch is rite will be seeing the the two most powerful machines coming to life….really ironman fan
June 18th, 2008 at 5:36 am
I think there’s almost no new way of arousing publicity. I don’t think Favs has been signed, but I think they earnestly want him, but they know this debate of “will he/won’t he” will spark more talk that keeps the torch burning.
In short, I think it’s a tactical measure.
That said, people are saying how they shouldn’t mess with the tone by introducng a new director, but look at the original star wars trilogy: three different directors, and yet a completely cohesive trilogy of film brilliance.